::I'm not sure I agree re. ESR. It is an exemplary exposition of the critical thinking required to effectively engage with a technical audience. I have no issues with people finding it difficult; this isn't a distro like Ubuntu where popularity is a consideration. Our focus is on contribution, so a degree of proficiency, or the desire to attain proficiency, is a prerequisite. Reading ''Smart Questions'' is a pretty good gauge of that willingness. [[User:Jasonwryan|Jasonwryan]] ([[User talk:Jasonwryan|talk]]) 06:58, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

::I'm not sure I agree re. ESR. It is an exemplary exposition of the critical thinking required to effectively engage with a technical audience. I have no issues with people finding it difficult; this isn't a distro like Ubuntu where popularity is a consideration. Our focus is on contribution, so a degree of proficiency, or the desire to attain proficiency, is a prerequisite. Reading ''Smart Questions'' is a pretty good gauge of that willingness. [[User:Jasonwryan|Jasonwryan]] ([[User talk:Jasonwryan|talk]]) 06:58, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

−

==<s> List of proposed amendments </s>==

+

== Fora vs Forums ==

−

I am submitting below some minor points I have noticed going through the page for review by [[User:Alad]] or other staff:

+

I noticed that while referring to the plural of "forum", some parts of this page used "fora" while others used "forums". Would it be possible to standardize the plural of "forum" on this page?

* If the staff in any of the fora '''feel''' that ''into'' '''considers''' that: staff is a collective noun and singular is generally used in US English. It involves the judgement of the staff rather than the feeling. Using plural can be appropriate in some circumstances (one can find debates around this topic in forums).

+

:"fora" generally refers to the various Arch Linux official communities (the forums, IRC, MLs), whereas "forums" is used to specifically denote the bulletin boards (bbs.archlinux.org), which is comprised of a number of different fora. Hope that helps :) [[User:Jasonwryan|Jasonwryan]] ([[User talk:Jasonwryan|talk]]) 21:35, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

−

* This type of content is much better suited to a blog or other personal web space and '''are''' considered ''into'' '''is'''

−

* True freedom in this community is to cultivate benevolence toward others and harmonize our attitude with the Arch Way by bringing only benefit to our peers ''into'' true freedom in this community is to cultivate benevolence toward others and '''to''' harmonize our attitude with the Arch Way by bringing only benefit'''s''' to our peers

:Thank you for doing this review. If these are the changes you've made, they should be applied again now - please check that. -- [[User:Lahwaacz|Lahwaacz]] ([[User talk:Lahwaacz|talk]]) 10:00, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

* There is only one official channel bot. {{ic|phrik!~archbot@archlinux/bot/phrik}}. Do not spam bot commands and limit your usage to things that are helpful. If you want to bring your own bot into any Arch Linux channel, ask the operators before doing so.

+

+

Rule in very different ways and have been sneaking in bridges to other chat protocols (usually discord) into the #archlinux channel.

+

This is against freenode's [https://freenode.net/changuide 'no logging without permission' ] guidelines, which the channel operators adopt for #archlinux.

+

+

I would like to extend or supplement that rule with something like:

+

+

* Bridging channels to other communication protocols like discord, matrix, slack, etc. is not allowed without the permission of the channel operators.

+

+

* Do not publish logs, processed or not, to the public without asking the operators for permission.

+

+

I'm not entirely happy with the explicit mention of these three messengers and would welcome suggestions to generalize it. Merging these two into the existing "no Bots" clause would be fine but I fear it would make it overly long and hard to read.

:How about: "Do not publish logs without the permission of operators, nor bridge to other protocols like discord, slack etc., without permission". [[User:Jasonwryan|Jasonwryan]] ([[User talk:Jasonwryan|talk]]) 07:55, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 07:55, 2 May 2019

Maybe make the section "correct" more clear

I'd like to see a clearer title for that section and add a little more on how users should effectively ask for help and report issues. ie they need to state the whole problem and what they have already tried as well as logs and error messages. how to report and ask smart questions are both great links.

Maybe "don't ask to ask" could also be added, as in, "can someone help me? My Arch install is broken!" type of messages.Meskarune (talk) 01:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't think the ask smart questions is such a great link to give people. It's good for understanding our culture but it's not good for smooth relations with people asking questions. However, I do think how to report should be added; it's concise and to the point without risking antagonizing the person with a question. MacGyver (talk) 14:00, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree re. ESR. It is an exemplary exposition of the critical thinking required to effectively engage with a technical audience. I have no issues with people finding it difficult; this isn't a distro like Ubuntu where popularity is a consideration. Our focus is on contribution, so a degree of proficiency, or the desire to attain proficiency, is a prerequisite. Reading Smart Questions is a pretty good gauge of that willingness. Jasonwryan (talk) 06:58, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Fora vs Forums

I noticed that while referring to the plural of "forum", some parts of this page used "fora" while others used "forums". Would it be possible to standardize the plural of "forum" on this page?

"fora" generally refers to the various Arch Linux official communities (the forums, IRC, MLs), whereas "forums" is used to specifically denote the bulletin boards (bbs.archlinux.org), which is comprised of a number of different fora. Hope that helps :) Jasonwryan (talk) 21:35, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Extend the no-bots clause for IRC

Recent event's have shown that people interpret the

There is only one official channel bot. phrik!~archbot@archlinux/bot/phrik. Do not spam bot commands and limit your usage to things that are helpful. If you want to bring your own bot into any Arch Linux channel, ask the operators before doing so.

Rule in very different ways and have been sneaking in bridges to other chat protocols (usually discord) into the #archlinux channel.
This is against freenode's 'no logging without permission' guidelines, which the channel operators adopt for #archlinux.

I would like to extend or supplement that rule with something like:

Bridging channels to other communication protocols like discord, matrix, slack, etc. is not allowed without the permission of the channel operators.

Do not publish logs, processed or not, to the public without asking the operators for permission.

I'm not entirely happy with the explicit mention of these three messengers and would welcome suggestions to generalize it. Merging these two into the existing "no Bots" clause would be fine but I fear it would make it overly long and hard to read.